Headline aside, it’s a good interview on the current and future state of artificial intelligence.
3 Replies to “Science Reinvents The Dog”
The problem that I see is a massive separation between what our governments want to try to achieve to reality of what is possible is a massive crash of our fuel supplies and electricity grid which also means internet as well.
We are on borrowed time as other countries are getting massive price increases that they can’t pay in energy costs.
Our politicians are currently playing chicken with our fuel supply that had a 50 year lifespan on the pipes.
But rather than fix this issue and get ready, they ignore the issue and use politics for a reality problem. This problem then is much worse as our politicians are lost on how to deal with it. Lack of good leadership understanding.
Always wanted to see the face of those wicked people who busy themselves working on a much better and more efficient AI just so they can hand it off to the highest bidder who’ll ultimately use it to unleash their particular brand of horror on the rest of us. I’d bet there are people looking at this guy’s research with keen interest.
As if we don’t have our hands full already dealing with the sociopathic carbon units of the world.
These guys wish they could make something as smart as a dog. They’re straining to equal the housefly and the cockroach.
It turns out that AI is a great deal harder than anyone thought 50 years ago. I recall seeing “learning machines” in the magazines and so forth. They thought the big stumbling block was computing density. If they could just put enough processors together, they’d be able to achieve AI and solve these problems.
Turns out that no, compute density is not the issue. It is much more difficult and fundamental than that. Computers are Turing machines. Dogs, cats, monkeys, humans, these are -not- Turing machines. Bee, flies, roaches, these things sort-of kind-of act like Turing machines, but when you get right down to it they’re probably not.
We’re waiting on somebody to come up with a completely new paradigm that more closely approaches what goes on in a mammal brain. It took from 1673 until about 1936 to come up with the paradigm we currently use. Not holding my breath for the next paradigm.
The problem that I see is a massive separation between what our governments want to try to achieve to reality of what is possible is a massive crash of our fuel supplies and electricity grid which also means internet as well.
We are on borrowed time as other countries are getting massive price increases that they can’t pay in energy costs.
Our politicians are currently playing chicken with our fuel supply that had a 50 year lifespan on the pipes.
But rather than fix this issue and get ready, they ignore the issue and use politics for a reality problem. This problem then is much worse as our politicians are lost on how to deal with it. Lack of good leadership understanding.
Always wanted to see the face of those wicked people who busy themselves working on a much better and more efficient AI just so they can hand it off to the highest bidder who’ll ultimately use it to unleash their particular brand of horror on the rest of us. I’d bet there are people looking at this guy’s research with keen interest.
As if we don’t have our hands full already dealing with the sociopathic carbon units of the world.
These guys wish they could make something as smart as a dog. They’re straining to equal the housefly and the cockroach.
It turns out that AI is a great deal harder than anyone thought 50 years ago. I recall seeing “learning machines” in the magazines and so forth. They thought the big stumbling block was computing density. If they could just put enough processors together, they’d be able to achieve AI and solve these problems.
Turns out that no, compute density is not the issue. It is much more difficult and fundamental than that. Computers are Turing machines. Dogs, cats, monkeys, humans, these are -not- Turing machines. Bee, flies, roaches, these things sort-of kind-of act like Turing machines, but when you get right down to it they’re probably not.
We’re waiting on somebody to come up with a completely new paradigm that more closely approaches what goes on in a mammal brain. It took from 1673 until about 1936 to come up with the paradigm we currently use. Not holding my breath for the next paradigm.